# This takes the cake: Proposed ban to eliminate smoking... in CIGAR SHOPS



## gehrig97

Just. Wow.



> Minneapolis to Mull Tobacco Shop Smoking
> Posted: November 11, 2010
> 
> Lawmakers in Minneapolis have been asked to consider a proposal that would, if passed, prohibit customers from smoking in any of the city's tobacco shops.
> 
> According to a Fox9.com report, the amendment proposal is meant to close a legal loophole and combat businesses that are applying for tobacco-only licenses but are not necessarily cigar retailers; city licensing manager Grant Wilson told Fox 9 this type of action goes against the spirit of Minnesota's Clean Indoor Air Act.
> 
> The Cigar Rights of America has called upon its members to sign a petition that fights the proposal, and there will be a hearing on the proposed ordinance on November 29.
> 
> To sign the petition, go to CRA - Cigar Rights of America


----------



## jimbo1

wild....can't smoke a cigar in a cigar shop?? gov. sticking its nose in too much, if you don't want to be around cigars don't go in the shop, common sense, wonder when its going to be illegal to smoke on my ownn back patio, sooner than later
I think.


----------



## shannensmall

I'm actually surprised it took this long for them to try this. I know around here they got the no smoking on places of business, with something to do with a workers right to work in a "safe" IE smoke free environment.


----------



## Plop007

That's crazy..


----------



## gibson_es

That's ****ing rediculous. I would go smoke in therenyway, stupid ****ers.


----------



## MATADOR

That is crazy talk. Our fathers would be rolling over in their graves!


----------



## Rock31

No one walks into a cigar shop that doesn't want to smoke and no one would take a Job at a cigar shop if they didn't enjoy tobacco, they are getting out of control with these proposed laws.


----------



## FridayGt

I'm sorry, but holy crap, I thought Virginia was bad...


----------



## gibson_es

Holy Shit it would be torturous to work in a cigar shop and not be able to smoke,


----------



## smelvis

gibson_es said:


> Holy Shit it would be torturous to work in a cigar shop and not be able to smoke,


Not only that but doesn't it just sound ridiculous to not smoke in a smoke shop, I seriously doubt many non smokers would want to work in one anyway.
Viva La Revolution :behindsofa: lets all burn or Tobacco F**k em :evil:


----------



## gibson_es

This theory is also why I could never work in a liquor store.


----------



## Mante

LMAO Blake. The USA is so screwed up with all these pen pushers and nobody dipshits pushing to take away smokers rights all the time. Oh hang on a minute! We've had similar laws for years. Dammit! ound::mmph::frusty:


----------



## tobacmon

You can't be serious--people look what the government is trying to do here. Before you know it they will be requiring every shop owner install camera systems in place to monitor our every move like whats being done outside on the streets every day now. Instead of the lazy bastids hiring more personnel to walk the beat the lazy bastids are doing what we don't want done. --This is as communistic as day old bread--WTF!


----------



## d_day

I get why they want to do it. Looks like regular businesses are applying for (and apparently getting) tobacco permits, so they can call themselves a smokeshop, thereby bypassing the current anti smoking laws. Without getting into an argument over the current law, how about they just change the law so it reads like California's? In California, _any_ business can allow smoking if at least 50% of their sales come from tobacco. Seems to me that would keep the regular businesses from skirting the law, while still allowing legitimate smoke shops to allow smoking.


----------



## gibson_es

I agree with d_day (the only person I know with an underscore in there birthname.. lol.)


----------



## Cigary

gehrig97 said:


> Just. Wow.


*According to a Fox9.com report, the amendment proposal is meant to close a legal loophole and combat businesses that are applying for tobacco-only licenses but are not necessarily cigar retailers; *

*This statement doesn't even make sense...not against cigar retailers? That's like saying we are going to make it against the law to drink alcoholic beverages in bars but it's not necessarily against those who want to open a bar afterwards.*

*This is more insanity and now they are so brazen in their wording they are basically shoving it up our collective a$$es while smirking thinking we're not going to do anything about it. I hope the people of that city picket night and day and show up in force. If they don't do that then they deserve to have every cigar retailer and business close down. It's time that people get off their butts and fight this kind of stuff...makes me so mad I feel like smoking a cigar in City Hall.*


----------



## Frinkiac7

Minneapolis, although not as talked about, is about as nanny-state as you can get between San Francisco and NYC. It's absolutely horrible, and the local government here are complete nanny-staters. Not a week goes by where I don't praise the day I moved out of Minneapolis. 

That being said, there are a couple of great cigar shops with smoking areas that will really suffer for this if it goes through. Snow just hit this weekend and it won't be until April when brave souls can venture outside for outdoor smoking...stores that allow space for smoking indoors are really the only game in town for a lot of folks. 

I'm sure all of the alternative yoga, peace-and-love bookstores, and homemade antioxidant yogurt craft breweries that surround this humble B&M would be happy to see the cigar store with the American flag in the window and a bunch of smoking men get kicked out though...it doesn't exactly "vibe" with the "progressive, green, and eco-friendly" neighborhood they've got going on there...more'n one hippie would be glad to see it go.


----------



## thebayratt

Can't smoke a cigar *in *a cigar shop.........

_
Next thing you know, you can't drink a beer in a bar!_

"excuse me sir, these bar stools are for people that want to sit and stare at me all day; no drinking in here. If you wish to drink your beer, you must take it home, and bring me back the glass. Or I could make you a Sherly Temple"


----------



## MoreBeer

Time to build a smoke shack in the yard and fire up the propane heaters! Drinking and smoking inside those is MANDATORY!


----------



## Cigary

thebayratt said:


> Can't smoke a cigar *in *a cigar shop.........
> 
> _Next thing you know, you can't drink a beer in a bar!_
> 
> "excuse me sir, these bar stools are for people that want to sit and stare at me all day; no drinking in here. If you wish to drink your beer, you must take it home, and bring me back the glass. Or I could make you a Sherly Temple"


ROFL...so friggin true.


----------



## TheFreakShow

Washington state already has that law. The only cigar shops that I know of you can smoke in are the ones on the Indian reservations.


----------



## CaptainBlenderman

I've got a mind to move to Minneapolis and quickly set up a yoga studio with a walk-in humidor for those who want to find some peace doing yoga while smoking a cigar. After we are done with the yoga routine, we can all sit around and sip yoghurt smoothies and fire up another one while discussing how smoking a good stogie promotes peace and love. Peace of mind and love of the leaf (and the brotherhood). I don't think they'll know what to do with that...


----------



## commonsenseman

This pisses me off to no end. I signed a petition from CRA to try & stop it. I guess it e-mails city council member because 5 minutes later some POS from the city council e-mailed me back questioning me about why I signed it, asking what shop I go to & why I disagree. I sent him a long e-mail explaining why I thought it's complete ludicris. No reply yet, big surprise.


----------



## gjcab09

I don't personally care what type of business it is, or where it's located. If the owner wants to allow smoking inside, it should be allowed, period. It's like this country is being run by one huge, out of control, Home Owners Association.


----------



## smelvis

TheFreakShow said:


> Washington state already has that law. The only cigar shops that I know of you can smoke in are the ones on the Indian reservations.


Yep they started screwing us years ago, some casinos won't allow cigars but will cigs, go figure!


----------



## alyons108

Wisconsin's new law (started summer 2010) disallows smoking in new smoke shops. Those that existed in June 09 are grandfathered in.


----------



## sengjc

It's been like that since 5 or so years aga here in Australia. Seems the rest of the Developed Nations by the looks of it except the US.

Some businesses closed as a result and those that didn't adapted with an outdoor smoking area.


----------



## Adoro Puros

I agree with what everyone said, accept to add this: it's not just Minneapolis, it's the whole F***ing state of Minnesota that is a "nanny state". :frusty:

Frankly, enough is enough!

I am voting with my feet and money! :cheer2:

I am moving back to Phoenix, Arizona where it's warm, and the taxes are low (very low) and this insanity concerning cigars does NOT exist. Taxes are about .6 cents a stick ( vs 70% a box in Minnesota + 10% tax in the city of Minneapolis). AND.... you can smoke in cigar stores in Arizona. eace:

So yeah, I'm voting with my feet next month!


----------



## Tritones

We'll be waitin' for ya, Marty!


----------



## Sarge

that's kind of funny... but sad... I was thinking about this the other day. Wondering how long it would be now that we have these smoking bans in different counties and states when would they target the few Cigar Bars out there. This is an entirely nothing subject but seriously, since when did we need Government writing laws for all this stupid stuff? Seems like everything and anything is subject to a law or law being passed on it. Smoking, Video Games, Walking down the street, talking on your phone...


----------



## Ol' Times Cigars

This was also posted on the CRA website, they have petitions against these types of legislations that you can sign online. I would recommend you head over to their site and sign it, I know I did and will continue to.


----------



## marked

Adoro Puros said:


> I agree with what everyone said, accept to add this: it's not just Minneapolis, it's the whole F***ing state of Minnesota that is a "nanny state". :frusty:
> 
> Frankly, enough is enough!
> 
> I am voting with my feet and money! :cheer2:
> 
> I am moving back to Phoenix, Arizona where it's warm, and the taxes are low (very low) and this insanity concerning cigars does NOT exist.* Taxes are about .6 cents a stick ( vs 70% a box in Minnesota + 10% tax in the city of Minneapolis).* AND.... you can smoke in cigar stores in Arizona. eace:
> 
> So yeah, I'm voting with my feet next month!


Things may have changed since the last time you were here. Taxes are now .22 cents per stick + 9-10% sales tax, depending on where you are.

I've been thinking about going back to Oregon because of the tax situation in Arizona. After 11 years of living there, it's hard to swallow the insane taxes I pay here. There's no sales tax in Oregon. They're also a citizen-ballot-initiative state, and they simply don't let ridiculous taxes happen, and if they do, they fight to reverse them.

"Thanks to the efforts of Esler-Rowe, McIntire and Witt, plus several thousand angry cigar smokers, Oregon became the first state in this nation's history to reduce a tobacco tax. Maybe it's a sign of things to come."

And the kicker is that Oregon is a blue state. Kinda goes against the preconceived notion that Democrats are all about raising taxes.


----------



## eyesack

thebayratt said:


> Can't smoke a cigar *in *a cigar shop.........
> 
> _
> Next thing you know, you can't drink a beer in a bar!_
> 
> "excuse me sir, these bar stools are for people that want to sit and stare at me all day; no drinking in here. If you wish to drink your beer, you must take it home, and bring me back the glass. Or I could make you a Sherly Temple"


Actually, I'll take a Roy Rogers!
Really, though? Exactly what is the benefit of driving customers away from the local businesses that help to support the economy through paying taxes? Especially when cigar-tax is already so high that the state will lose money when people stop buying cigars? I'd like to know where this kind of backwards logic is going...:der:


----------



## MATADOR

TAXES...

26% Tabacco Tax plus Sales Tax at 8.25% !!!


----------



## BillyVoltaire

I just don't get it. What is next? Banning drinking in bars?

Good grief.

BV


----------



## szyzk

"I don't personally care what type of business it is, or where it's located. If the owner wants to allow smoking inside, it should be allowed, period. It's like this country is being run by one huge, out of control, Home Owners Association."

I agree 100%, and this was exactly one of the fights I had when PA started pushing to ban smoking in bars/restaurants. If a proprietor feels that his business will grow by catering to smokers, don't stop him from catering to smokers. Likewise, if there's money to be made by catering to non-smokers, somebody's going to open up the same exact business minus the smoke. Simple as that.


----------



## marked

szyzk said:


> If a proprietor feels that his business will grow by catering to smokers, don't stop him from catering to smokers. Likewise, if there's money to be made by catering to non-smokers, somebody's going to open up the same exact business minus the smoke. Simple as that.


Wouldn't it be awesome if the rest of the world operated based on common sense, instead of trying to legislate every move we make?


----------



## szyzk

"Wouldn't it be awesome if the rest of the world operated based on common sense, instead of trying to legislate every move we make?"

I'm going to have to ask Big Brother if I can agree with you. I'll fill out the required paperwork and submit in triplicate, and after 7 to 9 weeks when they give me an answer I'll have one for you.


----------



## tmac77

Here in Toronto Canada we can't even open up cigar lounges anymore let alone smoke in a cigar shop. There is now talk about that they are looking to ban smoking on patios.


----------



## LincolnSmokes

Lincoln, NE has a similar ban, it's a bunch of BS. A business that is allowed to sell a product and then that product can't even be used on the premises. What a joke!


----------



## Krish the Fish

alyons108 said:


> Wisconsin's new law (started summer 2010) disallows smoking in new smoke shops. Those that existed in June 09 are grandfathered in.


Ohio is the same way, though the old stores must have had 80% of sales come from tobacco.

Some legislation is just plain ridiculous.


----------



## thebayratt

Looks like we will be going back to the "old" days of Speak Easys and hidden places to do our smoking.

_What was the secret knock again Gary??_


----------



## marked

LincolnSmokes said:


> Lincoln, NE has a similar ban, it's a bunch of BS. A business that is allowed to sell a product and then that product can't even be used on the premises. What a joke!


It's really sad, because they're putting small business out of business. If we couldn't smoke in the B&Ms here, they'd simply go out of business. The regulars buy there because the B&M is their place to get together with friends and smoke. If they didn't have that meeting place, they'd probably just buy on the internet. As it is, there are tons of B&Ms in the Phoenix area. I see people on here all the time saying that there are no decent B&Ms in their areas. It would be interesting to compare the lack of B&Ms to the local legislation against tobacco.


----------



## szyzk

"Looks like we will be going back to the "old" days of Speak Easys and hidden places to do our smoking."

Aside from community projects, this is one of the big reasons I became a member of the Elks Club. We have a beautiful 100 year old building with a gorgeous smoking room, plenty of cheap & strong drinks, and nobody whines about smokers infringing on their rights to clean air & healthy lifestyle choices. Plus it's air conditioned in the summer and heated in the winter!


----------



## thegoldenmackid

There is little explanation as to why they want to do this, although the tobacco shops left themselves open to some clarification when they lobbied to create the grey area of "sampling" in prior legislation. 


Elizabeth Glidden (above) is the person who is behind all this, if you want to make some phone calls (612) 673-2208 is the number.


----------



## samsamsamm2003

I would kill for your problems, not to sound unsympathetic. But in Australia smoking is banned in all indoor locations including cigar clubs (unless you are a millionaire and gamble enough to go to the high rollers room at the Casino in Melbourne.) It is even banned in personal vehicles in Western Australia and its on its way in Sydney. And a merch cannot display any tobacco products or tell you anything about the product. Taxes are like $409 per kilo or $185 per lb, to give you an idea the Padron 2000 is $17.50. The national health service is always the excuse to up the tax even though smokers pay 20 times more than they "take out" of the system (then also assuming smokers don't pay an income tax or the national sales tax.) To make matters worse the tax was upped this month after an eye watering 25% increase last year. Fight on, before it becomes like this place.


----------



## gjcab09

szyzk said:


> "Wouldn't it be awesome if the rest of the world operated based on common sense, instead of trying to legislate every move we make?"
> 
> I'm going to have to ask Big Brother if I can agree with you. I'll fill out the required paperwork and submit in triplicate, and after 7 to 9 weeks when they give me an answer I'll have one for you.


Don't _ask_ them for crying out loud...it'll only tip them off!!


----------



## gjcab09

samsamsamm2003 said:


> I would kill for your problems, not to sound unsympathetic. But *in Australia smoking is banned in all indoor locations including cigar clubs* (unless you are a millionaire and gamble enough to go to the high rollers room at the Casino in Melbourne.) *It is even banned in personal vehicles in Western Australia and its on its way in Sydney. And a merch cannot display any tobacco products or tell you anything about the product. Taxes are like $409 per kilo or $185 per lb*, to give you an idea the Padron 2000 is $17.50. The national health service is always the excuse to up the tax even though smokers pay 20 times more than they "take out" of the system (then also assuming smokers don't pay an income tax or the national sales tax.) To make matters worse the tax was upped this month after an eye watering 25% increase last year. Fight on, before it becomes like this place.


This kind of infringement on personal liberties is so bizarre, it's incomprehensible to me....it's like something out of a sci-fi movie...and when I think of Australia, I think of huge, wide-open spaces, and independent minded people...it's all so incongruous to me...should be a warning to everyone...Any way welcome aboard samsam...


----------



## yvesmary

szyzk said:


> "I don't personally care what type of business it is, or where it's located. If the owner wants to allow smoking inside, it should be allowed, period. It's like this country is being run by one huge, out of control, Home Owners Association."
> 
> I agree 100%, and this was exactly one of the fights I had when PA started pushing to ban smoking in bars/restaurants. If a proprietor feels that his business will grow by catering to smokers, don't stop him from catering to smokers. Likewise, if there's money to be made by catering to non-smokers, somebody's going to open up the same exact business minus the smoke. Simple as that.


I don't understand the logic behind the governments' actions. If there was such a demand for smoke-free restaurants and bars wouldn't someone have done that long ago. And if it's in the interest of the workers, don't work there if you don't like smoke.


----------



## Delsana

I may be wrong but doesn't Canada have this already?


----------



## athomas2

Ok federal gov't wide and local/state gov't, A ton of people smoke that are politicians. Basically, all this is to keep tobacco users in the gov't. If they didnt vote for what the non-smokers wanted, there would be no smokers in the gov't because they wouldn't be voted back and we would all be screwed. Hell obama smokes and that was one of the first things people found out when he got into the white house. Still he pushes for tobacco taxes that raise everyone's. This is all i choice and its a great relaxing one. I enjoy smoking at the lounge when its cold outside and i can't smoke inside.


----------



## taxedman

Delsana said:


> I may be wrong but doesn't Canada have this already?


Not everywhere yet....there are a couple lounges in Montreal, grandfathered after smoking bans passed there. I would bet every other large municipality is smoke free, as in completely. Where I now live, there is no smoking allowed in any establishment, including patios. The taxes here are also insane....If you spent $60 on a Behike 52, wouldn't you want to smoke it where ever the f*&k you want!? Just like Oz, they point to healthcare costs to justify it.


----------



## Delsana

athomas2 said:


> Ok federal gov't wide and local/state gov't, A ton of people smoke that are politicians. Basically, all this is to keep tobacco users in the gov't. If they didnt vote for what the non-smokers wanted, there would be no smokers in the gov't because they wouldn't be voted back and we would all be screwed. Hell obama smokes and that was one of the first things people found out when he got into the white house. Still he pushes for tobacco taxes that raise everyone's. This is all i choice and its a great relaxing one. I enjoy smoking at the lounge when its cold outside and i can't smoke inside.


Obama smoked cigarettes (cigars I'm not sure of) but he mentioned and confirmed he quit, so... pressure or what not, but probably could for public image and in some circumstances, his health.

As for the cigars in Canada...

Since the only LEGAL (kind of) way for me to get some Cuban cigars or at least try a few is to go all the way to Canada (which is about 4 hours from my house) and buy one and smoke one there...

Where exactly can I smoke the cigar then?


----------



## taxedman

If you are going to Windsor, there are numerous parks along the river that would be a great place to have a smoke once better weather is here. I have read that city council there is pushing to ban smoking in 'municipally owned recreation areas' which I assume means parks, public squares, etc. so you might want to check that out first. This saddens me since I was born and raised there and have a lot of fond memories of both Windsor and Detroit. I spent the first half of the seventies going to concerts and clubs in the Motor City.


----------



## ChrisD

Yeah, Minnesota sucks. I recently got a letter in the mail from the Minnesota Revenue Service saying that I owed a 70% tax on a mailorder tobacco purchase. I of course mailed in a check, but thought it was insane. 

Not allowed to smoke in any retaurants or bars in Minnesota. 

Casino's in my area will not allow pipes or cigars, but will allow cigarette smoking. 

I personally really enjoy visiting the B&M's in Minneapolis and St. Paul. I am willing to spend the $17 for a taxed tin of Escudo if it means I can sit down in the big comfy chairs, watch the flat screen tv, and b.s. with the others in the lounge while I smoke a pipe or cigar. 

It was even a "pipedream" of mine to open up a pipe/cigar lounge in Minnesota, but I have come to realize that this would probably not be a wise business model as the tobacco laws are changing so fast, and getting so much more restrictive in Minnesota. 

I hope these anti-smoking laws are not passed. There are a lot of people in Minnesota who like to smoke in the B&M's, especially in the winter.


----------



## Hirize

Just watched "1984" on the tube......................mmmmmmmmmmmmm!?

Aloha, Pete


----------



## Smokin Easy

gjcab09 said:


> I don't personally care what type of business it is, or where it's located. If the owner wants to allow smoking inside, it should be allowed, period. It's like this country is being run by one huge, out of control, Home Owners Association.


AMEN BROTHER! HOA's are communist organizations!

When it comes down to it the non-smokers out there that don't want to be subjected to our smoke should have that option, just like I should have the option to smoke after dinner and enjoy a nice drink while doing it! What was wrong with having a smoking section and a non-smoking section? I used to be a non-smoker (until I found cigars) and never had a problem with smokers having their own section. It's a choice, but nowadays the Gov't is all about taking that choice away, hence Obamacare. They just want to shove whatever they can down our throats and there are so many mindless sheep out there that are allowing them to do it to "protect our freedom" *scoffs*. Our forefathers wouldn't even be able to recognize the state of our great country if they came here today. How I weep for those that gave and continue to give their lives to protect the freedom of people who are so willing to surrender it one law at a time :tsk: .


----------



## Cantiloper

YvesMary wrote, "I don't understand the logic behind the governments' actions. If there was such a demand for smoke-free restaurants and bars wouldn't someone have done that long ago. And if it's in the interest of the workers, don't work there if you don't like smoke."

Mary, you need to understand that the "health risk to workers" thing is just a tool that they latched onto in the late 80s when it became obvious that the general public at that point was not buying the "whiff of smoke is deadly" argument. There was little demand for more than nonsmoking sections in restaurants and virtually no demand for smoke-banned bars. The real drive is social engineering although individual Antismoker factions have sub-drives as well (Try googling "Recovery From ASDS" in quotes to see a suggested breakdown of their motivations.)

About five years ago I wrote to the House of Lords in the UK in an effort to head off their ban. One of the more interesting responses I got was from Lady Elaine Murphy and showed the motivation pretty clearly in "New Age Speak" :

===

Dear Mr McFadden, 
You and many others have completely missed the point about smoking and health. The aim is reduce the public acceptability of smoking and the culture which surrounds it. We know that legislation which discourages all public smoking will have the better impact on public understanding and perception of smoking as an unacceptable habit.
Hence fewer people will smoke, hence health overall will improve.

Yours, Elaine Murphy 

===


----------



## Cantiloper

Smokin' Easy, speaking of surrendering our freedoms one law at a time, are you familiar with Mussolini's Freedom Salami?

Picture a guy working in a butcher shop. If he tried to walk out with a whole salami he'd get fired. But if he simply lops off a little slice every day and pops it in his mouth he'll have gotten that whole salami by the end of the year.

Ban smoking in airplane sections, then on short flights, then ban smoking in all airplanes rather than allowing a few to be left for smokers, banning it in all train cars, all restaurants, all bars... never once allowing smokers to have their own selected, secluded, and smoky spaces... and then why not move on to banning it in cars, condos, apartments, and row homes?

In Bhutan they just arrested a monk for tobacco possession (It's illegal except for very small amounts there, and even then the gestap... er... police can demand to see your "papers" proving you've acquired it legally.) and sentenced him to three years in prison.


----------



## Enrique1780

What's next? A ban on the sale of cigars in cigar shops?


----------



## TCBSmokes

gjcab09 said:


> I don't personally care what type of business it is, or where it's located. If the owner wants to allow smoking inside, it should be allowed, period. It's like this country is being run by one huge, out of control, Home Owners Association.


Good way of putting it. TCB


----------



## Laynard

d_day said:


> I get why they want to do it. Looks like regular businesses are applying for (and apparently getting) tobacco permits, so they can call themselves a smokeshop, thereby bypassing the current anti smoking laws. Without getting into an argument over the current law, how about they just change the law so it reads like California's? In California, _any_ business can allow smoking if at least 50% of their sales come from tobacco. Seems to me that would keep the regular businesses from skirting the law, while still allowing legitimate smoke shops to allow smoking.


Thanks for the info. I was actually searching this thread to understand how the local B&M has a smoking lounge. I thought Cali's laws were some of the strictest so I thought the owner just didn't GAF. Good to know they won't be shut down for enjoying their freedoms.


----------



## OldWestChris

That’s actually a good idea for California; it seems to create a happy medium between those who don’t want to be exposed to smoke and those who do. Then, those companies (I’m thinking this legislation is targeted toward bars and pubs in particular) that don’t sell a lot of tobacco aren’t trying to cheat the system in order to get more customers as well. Maybe other states should follow suit?


----------



## huynha

I'm glad I dont live in Delaware where I read there is no indoor smoking of any kind, anywhere even in cigar shops.


----------



## Incognito11

we've had that law for about 10 years here in washington and there have actually been proposals to repeal the act but nothing has made it through. Currently the only places to smoke are casino's and the few places who have loop holed the law


----------



## Gigmaster

As stupid as it sounds, it's been that way here in Ga. and in Tn. for years. You can't smoke in any public building, period....not even a bar. You can only smoke in a bar if it is a private club. That means you can't sample any tobacco before you buy it. 

I think in places that have laws like this, business owners, and other people should get together and file a lawsuit against the state, because that is over-stepping their authority. A business owner has the right to control his/her business, as long as it does not violate anyone's rights. You have no right to not be exposed to smoke, or any other pollutants like car exhaust, farm smells, industrial pollution, etc... You only have the freedom to avoid these places, and we all wish sincerely that anti-smokers would exercise this freedom more often.


----------



## vuttomundo

With the way things are headed, it wont be long before the simple possession of tobacco is an arrestable offense. Your cigars you love will be treated the same as cocaine and heroin.


----------



## Rustybarnacle

I'm in Canada too and our province is the worst that I know of. Here is a quote from the govt website:

It is against the law to smoke in any indoor public place or worksite, including pubs, bars, restaurants, and shopping centres. Designated smoking rooms are non-existent, and public transit, transit shelters, taxis and work vehicles are also smoke-free.

In addition, there is a 3 metre non-smoking “buffer zone” around public and work place doorways, opening windows and air intakes including apartments and condominiums. Click here to learn more about BC’s Tobacco Laws.

Additional City of Vancouver Tobacco Laws

In addition to the provincial restrictions described above, the City of Vancouver is putting more stringent health by-laws into effect. The City of Vancouver bylaw bans smoking on restaurant/bar patios and bans smoking within 6 meters of doors/windows, as well as 6 meters from customer service areas, including patios.


----------



## Branzig

Rustybarnacle said:


> I'm in Canada too and our province is the worst that I know of. Here is a quote from the govt website:
> 
> It is against the law to smoke in any indoor public place or worksite, including pubs, bars, restaurants, and shopping centres. Designated smoking rooms are non-existent, and public transit, transit shelters, taxis and work vehicles are also smoke-free.
> 
> In addition, there is a 3 metre non-smoking "buffer zone" around public and work place doorways, opening windows and air intakes including apartments and condominiums. Click here to learn more about BC's Tobacco Laws.
> 
> Additional City of Vancouver Tobacco Laws
> 
> In addition to the provincial restrictions described above, the City of Vancouver is putting more stringent health by-laws into effect. The City of Vancouver bylaw bans smoking on restaurant/bar patios and bans smoking within 6 meters of doors/windows, as well as 6 meters from customer service areas, including patios.


Washington is the exact same. EXACT.

0 public smoking indoors, strictly enforced. 25 foot rule applies to all doors when smoking in public and all outdoor eating areas (including bar patios) are considered "grounds of the business" so it is a no smoke zone. I don't necessarily disagree with this, if I am at a nice bistro or the like, I don't want to breathe cig smoke while eating. But at a dive bar where a cigar would be nice? Gets annoying quick.

And as far as the whole no smoking in cigar shops and lounges, that has already happened here. They made all the businesses reapply for "public smoking permits" and then just deny them all so they lose half their business. The last one that still has a fully functioning cigar bar and lounge on this side of my state is on an Indian Reservation...


----------



## Regiampiero

Who exactly thought that smoking in a cigar shop wasn't good in the first place? I would imagine that everyone that walks in a cigar shop is a cigar smoker in the first place! This seems like a law being pushed to appease no one, and piss off everyone!


----------



## Tobias Lutz

I'm torn on things like this because in reality I am only worried about the "bigger picture" of losing access to my cigars and pipe tobacco, that I enjoy on my personal property, at a reasonable price. However, I know that anything that erodes personal freedom as it pertains to tobacco is simply a stepping stone towards that ultimate loss of privilege which I hold so tightly to. This is why I think it is important for all smokers to stay up on legislative matters like these, even if that particular piece of legislation really seems of little consequence to them personally.


----------



## JustinThyme

There is always a loophole.
Evidently this was all started due to bars trying to get tobacco licenses just so they could allow smoking in their establishments. They took the wrong route.

A few posts up Gigmaster hit the nail on the head. 
Smoking bans only apply to public places.

A lot of bars lost a lot of business as smoking and drinking go hand in hand. A successful move by many bars that has yet to be challenged to my knowledge is to go private. Not that this makes it exclusive or anything but works around the law of banned smoking in public places. Thing is anyone can become a member, you pay your $1 membership fee at the door and get a membership card. The fee is discounted from the first drink purchase. They log you in the register book, done. Florida was one of the first places I saw this going on as they were also the first on the lets ban smoking everywhere band wagon. These formerly public bars turned private clubs segregate smoking from non smoking areas so they can appeal to all their clientele but bottom line is once they changed it to a private club the public smoking ban no longer applies.


----------



## CWO

The editors address the lunacy gripping the country in the new issue of Cigar Aficionado by pointing out that everyone is running around trying to legalise marijuana while trying to essentially outlaw tobacco (and lets face it, that is their ultimate goal). When the heck did we get to the point where some group of morons who apparently consider themselves a kind of elite ruling class decided it's their duty to impose their likes and dislikes on the rest of us? I mean really, it's OK to buy and smoke pot now in some states but tobacco is evil and must be prohibited? I worry that the day may come when it will be illegal for me to smoke cigars on my patio because I'm contributing global warming and exposing birds flying overhead to second hand smoke.


----------



## CigarInspector

I definitely have no problem with legalizing marijuana, but I totally agree there's a contradiction here. Pot smokers love to try and sell everyone that there are absolutely no health risks associated with marijuana, but it's all a question of smoking in moderation or not--too much of -anything- in your lungs will cause problems. The average cigar smoker is hardly a chain smoker, so I fail to understand why smoking cigars is so terrible.

Am I the only person here by the way who keeps getting anti-smoking ads from Google in the top banner? Just a little ironic?


----------

